2012-12-26
2013-01-03
PROGRAM
Book TV 16
Hannity 10
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 97
CNNW 76
CSPAN 47
CNBC 30
CSPAN2 26
FBC 21
KPIX (CBS) 20
KGO (ABC) 17
WRC 17
KQED (PBS) 16
WBAL (NBC) 14
WTTG 14
WUSA (CBS) 14
KTVU (FOX) 12
KRCB (PBS) 11
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 608

Set Clip Length:


to be emphasized, especially in view of your comments. this package is vital for future deficit-reduction efforts. setting the stage for a balanced approach from here on out. delaying sequestration. yesterday, president obama again said he is committed to deficit reduction. but he emphasized several times, and i " "we have got to do this in a balanced, responsible way, with additional revenue as well as spending cuts." so i urge its passage. this bill sets the important precedent i mentioned in terms of additional revenues as well as spending cuts. the time is urgent. the time is now. we should support this legislation. i reserve the balance about time. >> the gentleman's time is reserved. gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. >> i yield three minutes to the distinguished chairman of the oversight committee, the gentleman from california, mr. issa. >> the gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes. >> mr. speaker, i would like to be speaking for this bill, but i cannot. in the 12 years, almost to the day, that i have served with in this body, i have voted for every tax cut, every tax cut. i remember many

might look like but will it actually do anything to cut the deficit? and what happens nay don't get a deal? we'll hear from two senators who have been working together on deficit reduction, assistant majority leader dick durbin of illinois, and senator tom coburn of oklahoma. then we'll look forward to 2013 with an all-star panel include peggy noonan of the "wall street journal." dee dee myers of "vanity fair." "time" magazine's executive editor michae michael duffy, and also "time" columnist joe klein. and we'll hear from major garrett and nancy cordes. >> you going to get a deal today, sir? >> hope so. >> o'donnell: it's all ahead because this is "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation" with bob schieffer. substituting for bob schieffer, cohost of "cbs this morning," norah o'donnell. >> o'donnell: good morning, again. tom coburn and dick durbin are here, and we'll turn to both of you in just a moment. but we want to start with some new information from chief white house correspondent major garrett and congressional correspondent

consumers, they are chronically bad at creating a balance between deficit and surplus regions. a geographic problem, and intertemporal. remember -- if that comes first, suddenly the money lender who later becomes a banker who later becomes wall street plays a hugely significant role in this process. the banker is the conduit of that recycling mechanism. when they get an increase in proportion as the result of their mediation of that process. given that, a failure of the banker is not the same thing as the failure of a clothes maker. suddenly, there are two things that must happen. one, society will demand that banks are not allowed to go to the wall. then bankers are affectively given carte blanche, free money for themselves. and the whole mechanism breaks down like in 2008. it is often said in the eurozone, we made a huge error in europe of binding disparate economies by means of common currency. this is not the first time these things that happened. it happened in the united states of america. you have disparate economies in the united states of america that are bound together monetarily

briefing room to tout a big victory -- >> tonight's agreement further reduces the deficit raising $620 billion in revenue. from the wealthiest households in america. >> president obama was at it again today. with a campaign style video sent out on obama-biden letterhead. even though the nonpartisan congressional budget office says the fiscal cliff deal will add $4 trillion to the national debt over the next ten years. >> any agreement we reach this week will redouse the deficit even more. asking the wealthiest 2% of americans to pay higher taxes for the first time in two decades. >> comparing this deal to a scenario where all the tax cuts expire. >> the failure to step up and do a big thing, he could have brought leadership to the table. he didn't. now he wants to talk about cutting, spending. it's a joke. >> the president notes he tried to get a big deal with speaker john boehner. that would have had 1.2 trillion in cuts. the republican walked away. though the explosive debate over raising the debt ceiling in the weeks ahead gives boehner a company a new opportunity to change the sour

and a broader effort for everybody. the fact is, the deficit is still too high. we're still investing too little in the things we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. that is what speaker boehner and i originally tried to negotiate a larger agreement that would put this country on a path while putting americans back to work, rebuilding roads and bridges and providing investments in areas like education and job- training. unfortunately, there was just not enough support or time for that kind of large agreement in a lame-duck session of congress. that failure comes with a cost. the process has made business more uncertain and consumers less confident. but we are continuing to chip away at this problem, step by step. last year, i signed into law $1.70 trillion in deficit reduction. tonight's agreement further reduces the deficit are raising $640 billion in revenue from the wealthiest households in america. there will be more deficit reduction as congress decides to do -- what to do with the automatic spending cuts. i want to make this point. as i have demonstrated, i am very open to c

is not the big agreement that will fully address our debt and deficit. an agreement that we hoped to be able to put together, an agreement that i support, one that includes pro-growth tax reform, bipartisan entitlement reform and finding savings in the federal budget. clearly, these items all need to be addressed, and they need to be addressed on the order of $4 trillion. to really get our deficit and our debt under control. that's the type of deal that i favor, and it's the kind of deal that we have got to get to, but if we can't do it all at once, let's do it in pieces. as the old saying goes, even the longest journey begins with a single step. well, if the first step is this tax deal, let's get going. to break the logjam, let's start with this piece, a tax deal that will ensure that taxes are not increased for middle-class americans. that is something we can and we must do. does it involve compromise? yes, it does, of course. for example, i think we should extend the current tax rates for all taxpayers. real revenue comes from economic growth, not higher taxes. and by closing loopholes an

in place as long as i'm president rid the deficit needs to be produced in a way that is balanced. everyone pays their fair share. everyone does their part. that is our economy works best. >> after much drama, the so- called fiscal cliff has been averted for now. we will look at what is in the senate approved by the house late last night. we will speak with economist juliet schor. after years of extreme weather, will 2013 be year zero in the battle over climate change? >> we're closer now them have ever been to what we need to do. i think we peeled away the layers of the onion and have gotten to the heart of things. as of tonight, we're going after the fossil fuel industries. [applause] >> will host a discussion between bill mckibben, founder of 350.org, and journalist christian parenti. he is author of "tropic of chaos: climate change and the new geography of violence." >> if the government allowed the epa too what it must do, raise the price of burning fossil fuels, that would help direct private money into renewable energy, help put people back to work. in the face of this crisis, we hav

this is a compromise on a tax portion. we're going to be all here again dealing with the issues of deficit and debt with that debt ceiling. this is kicking the can. it's a patch that should leave most folks on the center right. the fact the republicans have voted 2-1 against them speaks to the challenges to governing in the house. >> what's the explanation for that? this has now cost american real money. if republicans wanted to deal with this properly, why didn't we do it in the first 3517 days? >> i think there was a lot of resistance from both side. you had nancy pelosi and chuck schumer calling for a million dollars threshold in 2011 because both party have a lot of fizziers in terms of affluent voters versus less affluent voters. the republicans are ideologically committed to entitlement reform but many of their voters are very skeptical about entitlement reform the democrats, on the other hand, have a very effective message about tax fairness. whether or not that's a substantively idea is another matter. it resonates with our bases are whereas don't have a message on spending that resonates w

of deficit and debt with that debt ceiling. this is kicking the can. it's a patch that should leave most folks on the center right. the fact the republicans have voted 2-1 against them speaks to the challenges to governing in the house. >> what's the explanation for that? this has now cost american real money. if republicans wanted to deal with this properly, why didn't we do it in the first 517 days? >> i think there was a lot of resistance from both side. you had nancy pelosi and chuck schumer calling for a million dollars threshold in 2011 because both party have a lot of fizziers in terms of affluent voters versus less affluent voters. the republicans are ideologically committed to entitlement reform but many of their voters are very skeptical about entitlement reform the democrats, on the other hand, have a very effective message about tax fairness. whether or not that's a substantively idea is another matter. it resonates with our bases are whereas don't have a message on spending that resonates with their base. that's a big challenge for republicans going forward. >> the challenge

spending cuts better known as the sequester. on deficit and debt, the deal is more of a punt, but just averting the cliff has sent the markets soaring with the dow already up over 200 points. while it's no grand bargain, the bill does not tackle spending, by the way, don't miss the significance of this vote. republicans by an overwhelming majority in the senate and minority in the house voted to race taxes for the first time in two decades. just before 11:00 p.m., grover norquist tried to keep his infamous pledge from going obsolete, tweeting "the bush tax cuts lapsed at midnight last night. every "r" voting for senate bill is cutting taxes and keeping his or her pledge." sorry, grover, the impact of the bill is absolutely a tax hike. supporting it was not unanimous, all but five republicans and three democrats in the senate voted for it, but it was much closer in the house. 151 republicans, more than half of the gop members, voted no, including majority leader eric cantor and republican whip kevin mccarthy. at the end of the day, enough lawmakers across the aisle agreed to the deal, b

strongly for the simpson-bowles framework for deficit reduction, and yet here we are no closer to a sensible decision on how to bring our $1.1 trillion budget deficit and our $16.1 trillion public debt under control. well, guess what? time's up. no more games, no more excuses, no more ceking the can down the road. we have to act and we have to act in a way that puts our fiscal house in order, reassures the financial markets and puts the people ahead of politics, and we have to deal with these tax increases and spending cuts in a humane and tolerable way. the calm act does all of that. look what happens to people in need if we go over the cliff and just do nothing. on new year's day, the lowest income tax rate will jump from 10% back to the clinton-era rate of 15%. that's a pretty big financial bite for people in west virginia and i know in ohio, too, sir. these are people that are struggling right now. instead of an overnight tax hike of 5%, the calm act smooths the transition by phasing in increases over three years. so instead of a 5% increase, the 10% bracket would only go t

% of small businesses, but if we're serious about deficit reduction, we should make sure that the wealthier are paying a little bit more and combine that with spending cuts to reduce our deficit and put our economy on a long-term trajectory of growth. we have been talking to the republicans ever since the election was over. they have had trouble saying yes to a number of repeated offers. yesterday i had another meeting with the leadership, and i suggested to them if they can't do a comprehensive package of smart deficit reduction, let's, at minimum, make sure that people's taxes don't go up and that 2 million people don't lose their unemployment insurance. and i was modestly optimistic yesterday, but we don't yet see an agreement. and now the pressure's on congress to produce. if they don't, what i've said is that in the senate, we should go ahead and introduce legislation that would make sure middle-class taxes stay where they are, and there should be an up-or-down vote. everybody should have a right to vote on that. if republicans don't like it, they can vote no. but i actually think that

. but if we're serious about deficit reduction, we should make sure that the wealthier are paying a little bit more and combine that with spending cuts to reduce the deficit and put our economy on a long-term trajectory of growth. you know, we have been talking to the republicans ever since the election was over. they have had trouble saying yes to a number of repeated offers. yesterday i had another meeting with the leadership, and i suggested to them if they can't do a comprehensive package of smart deficit reduction, let's at minimum make sure that people's taxes don't go up and that 2 million people don't lose their unemployment insurance. and i was modestly optimistic yesterday. but we don't yet see an agreement, and now the pressure is on congress to produce. if they don't, what i've said is that in the senate, we should go ahead and introduce legislation that would make sure middle class taxes stay where they are, and there should be an up or down vote. everybody should have a right to vote on that. you know, if republicans don't like it, they can vote no. but i actually think that ther

with jim. the most deficit reduction is gog toome from no deal. and that's what we need. that's what this economy needs, the biggest threat to economic growth, if the deficit and the debt, 4 trillion, everybody talks about it as some sort of grand bargain. it's barely a start. this isn't a fiscal cliff, it's a fisca bunny hill, let's slide down it. >> if we slide down, jonas, in the first week, people are going to open up the paycheck and see less money there. i don't think that people understandhat at this point. >> people get used to tax cs, that's the problem. shoort-term expiring tax cuts, including the payroll tax cut. you know, it's not the best way to solve a problem, but th cliff is the result of not coming up with deals and they're not going to come up with battery deal, if it's negotiated it's nothe ideal way to solve it outfter deficit. we'd like t gradually raise taxes and cut spending, but this is the best we're going to get. any of the deals they would agree on, probably leave us to the other guest's pot, close to a trillion dollars anyway, and it's the closest shot lea

economy and brought an opportunity for everybody. the fact is, the deficit, is still too high. we are still investing too little in the things that we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. that is why speaker boehner and i try to negotiate a larger agreement. that would put this country on a path to pay down its debt bank also putting americans back to work rebuilding roads and bridges and providing investment the dark areas like investment and job training. unfortunately, there was not enough support or time for that kind of large agreement in a lame duck session of congress. that failure comes with a cost. the mess in nature of the process of the past several weeks has made business more uncertain and consumers less confident. but we are continuing to chip away at this problem. step by step. last year, i signed into law $1.70 trillion in deficit reduction. tonight's agreement for the reduces the deficit by raising billions of dollars in revenue from the wealthiest households in america. there will be more dead as a reduction as congress decides what to do about the

with the deficit in the biggest way. but their only priority is making sure that tax breaks for the wealthiest americans are protected. at some point, i think what's important is that they listen to the american people. >> joining me now, congressman chris von holland of maryland. good evening. it is a good sign that chained cpi is off the table. the senate will be back tomorrow at 11:00. how high is your optimism or pessimism at this moment? >> well, it was a very bad sign when senator mcconnell put this social security change on the table, as part of a small deal, that was obviously something that could have totally thrown a monkey wrench into the process. so the fact that they backed off that is obviously good news. but as senator reid said, there are lots of obstacles still to go. and the fundamental issue remains what the president just said in that clip. both today and for the last year, the number one priority of republicans have been -- has been to use the middle class tax cuts as leverage to try and extract these super big tax breaks for very wealthy individuals, including now their f

also need to address the fundamental causes of our debts and deficits, and that's out of control spending. >> i think it's a little unreasonable for senator reid to say that something that they produced on new year's eve, produced by a bunch of sleep-deprived dock gentlem ed e should adopt within 24 hours. >>> the president tries to draw a line in the sign on the debt battles still to come. >> while i will negotiate over many things, i will not have another debate with this congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they have already racked up. >>> plus, hillary watch, just a short time ago, an suv carrying former president bill clinton left from an underground garage at a new york hospital where his wife, hillary, is still being treated for that blood clot in her head. good day, happy new year, i'm andrea mitchell live in washington. president obama arrived in washington today after a victory on the future of tax rates for all americans, but the fiscal cliff has set the stage for still future debt ceiling debacles to come. joining me now for our daily fix in the

that could send the entire world in chaos? >> it's the trillion dollar deficits the president is not serious about addressing and a senate that hasn't appropriation deuce a budget in three years. it's time to belly up to the bar and put something on the table. we did last night. i'm proud of our conference for what it did. it was a difficult thing. i'm particular lif proud of the speaker. but, again, we'll see whether or not the leader of the free world is willing to lead and we'll see whether or not his party is willing to follow when it comes to serious spending cuts and entitlement reform. that's the only way can you get fiscal stability. >> noted conservative columnist charles krauthammer said this. i want to play it. >> there are a lot of conservatives, republican caucus in the house, who hate the bill and for good reason. i mean, this is a complete surrender on everything. >> i think he speaks for some of your colleagues who view 8 4% of the bush tax cuts being saved for permanent lip as a complete concession. you know the thirst for cutting spending in your conference is just so -- it

to address social security, which is now officially running a deficit, medicare, medicaid costs are growing ast nomically. at least do a dumb deal now and get people over the fiscal cliff and kick the can down the road, that's going to happen anyway. >> steve, no deal, bad deal? i kind of feel like i'm playing poker. what do you think? >> i can't believe it, but i agree with jim. the most deficit reduction is going to come from no deal. and that's what we need. that's what this economy needs, the biggest threat to economic growth, if the deficit and the debt, 4 trillion, everybody talks about it as some sort of grand bargain. it's barely a start. this isn't a fiscal cliff, it's a fiscal bunny hill, let's slide down it. >> if we slide down, jonas, in the first week, people are going to open up the paycheck and see less money there. i don't think that people understand that at this point. >> people get used to tax cuts, that's the problem. short-term expiring tax cuts, including the payroll tax cut. you know, it's not the best way to solve a problem, but this cliff is the result of not coming

fiscal problems but it small step forward in our efforts to reduce the federal deficit following on the one trillion dollar did he have it? spending. both steps advance efforts to put our fiscal house in order neither done, nor -- one nor combination of the two come close to solving problems and loaders must have the courage to reform our tax code and entitlement program such that we put it on a downward path as a percent of the economy. washington missed this magic moment to do something big, recuse the deficit, reform our tax code and fiscal entitlement programs we've known over a year this fiscal cliff is coming. washington politicians set it up. forcing them selfs to deal with our nation's lng term fiscal problems. after taking the country to the brink of economic disaster, washington still could not forth a consensus. it's now more critical than ever that policy makers return to negotiations building on the terms of the agreement and spending cuts. these negotiations will need to make the far more difficult reforms bringing spending further under control and making our progr

, by the way, i would support, but we're going to use those revenues, instead of reducing the deficit like the president campaigned on, what he wants to do is use those revenues to supplant spending reductions we've already agreed to. so you're not reducing the deficit. you're using new revenues, this revenue that's been campaigned on now for a year is being used not to reduce deficits but to keep spending cuts that have already been agreed to from happening. now, i don't know. i don't think there are many people on either side of the aisle that would think that is a very good idea. and so now what the president is doing is holding hostage -- holding hostage -- this agreement on taxes for all americans, he's holding that hostage to sort of pay for these -- to keep from doing the spending reductions that we've already agreed to. i don't know if most american americans -- i know they listen to us. i don't know if they quite yet understand what's happening. but i hope that's the case. mr. president, i'm going to just be -- say a couple more things. i -- i listened to the president yesterday o

deficit as a result of this. we also have something in the law which the presiding officer and i talked about for a moment, the alternative minimum tax. there was a time when they took a look at america and said how can this possibly be that some of the wealthiest people pay no taxes? so we established something called an alternative minimum tax which said even if under the regular tax code you escape all tax liability, you are going to be subject to the alternative minimum tax where you will pay something. well, it wasn't a bad idea 30 or 40 years ago when the debate started. but because we didn't index the income that was associated with it, over the years this alternative minimum tax hit not only the wealthy, but started hitting those middle-income categories. each year we had to kind of postpone the impact of this tax on middle-families, families in the $100,000 to $200,000 range. this has been vexing us for decades. this morning in the senate with the passage of this legislation we have dealt with the problem once and for all. we have a permanent fix on the alternative minimum tax.

of an overall deficit reduction package. if folks can't say yes to good offers, then i also have an obligation to the american people to make sure that the entire burden of deficit reduction doesn't fall on seniors who are relying on medicare. >> now, one of the questions in the days ahead will be whether or not this strategy back fired because republican leaders on the hill had their feathers ruffled by the fact that the president seemed to be blaming them. and speaker john boehner saying he should spend more time negotiating, why are you on tv while mitch mcconnell is working with harry reid to troy to get a deal. the president's point was if they do not make any progress on bipartisan talks in the senate since the clock is running out he wants a straight up and down vote on the senate on his fallback level. put it go in the $250,000 a year and extend unemployment benefits for 2 million americans americans americans, dana. >> this is bob beckel. are you done? >> i had a great question, but age before beauty. >> a lot of age and no beauty. >> what? >> ed, truth be known, and we see this fisca

in permanently so any effort to deal with the very large debt and deficit that we have going down the road here, revenue is pretty much off the table and we didn't get much. so those are my concerns. >> nobody felt like they got a great deal here, lynn. but moving forward does one side or the other have the upper hand? >> well, i think this goes in stages and since we have the looming debt ceiling in a few weeks, the upper hand ball is in the republican court right now, chris. the democrats had the advantage just now in the tax discussion because they didn't want to be tagged with getting the blame for most everyone's taxes rising. so it's situational sometimes. so next step is republican advantage. >> and because the cbo, i think, is with him on this, jim, they say this adds $4 trillion to the deficit. >> pretty aastonishing. there are some, you know, more conservative estimates of that. there's some folks who actually claim that things are slightly improved by this but that's based on a whole lot of assumptions. given what lynn just said, it will be interesting what happens in a couple months

. it was said this would add approximately $4 trillion to the deficit over the next nine years. that came out just about the time the republicans were meeting in a conference meeting earlier today. did that affect the view of the bill? >> it probably affected the view for some members. for those of us hanging around in the senate last night, on new year's eve, waiting for things to develop, we kind of saw that one coming. the score on this measure, while the tax was not available until really early this morning, was not a terrible surprise. a lot of these provisions floating around on capitol hill for many years, some of the provisions that increase the deficit are extensions of tax cuts or are one of the big- ticket items like getting rid of the need to catch the alternative tax. it was a tax not indexed for inflation when it was first enacted. a lot of these things are numbers everyone has always known. the $4 trillion is not a surprise. >> with roll-call, he has been very gracious to update us on what is happening in the house of representatives. i look forward to seeing you again on c-spa

in the broader effort to strengthen our economy and broaden opportunity for everybody. the fact is, the deficit is still too high. and we're still investing too little in the things that we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. and that's why speaker boehner and i originally tried to negotiate a larger agreement that would put this country on a path to paying down its debt while also putting americans back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges and providing investments in areas like education and job training. unfortunately, there just wasn't enough support or time for that larger agreement in lame duck session of congress. and that failure comes with a cross. business is more uncertain and consumers less confident. but we are continuing to chip away at this problem step by step. last year i signed into law $1.7 trillion in deficit reduction. tonight's agreement further reduces the deficit by raising $620 billion in revenue from the wealthiest households in america, and there will be more deficit reduction as congress decides what to do about the automatic spending cuts that we

opportunity for everybody. the fact is that the deficit is still too high. and we are still investing too little and the things that we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. and that's why speaker boehner and i originally tried to negotiate a larger agreement that would put this country on a path to paying down its debt while also putting americans back to work, rebuilding our roads and bridges, and providing investments in areas like education and job training. unfortunately there was not enough support or time for the large agreement in the laying duck session of congress. and that failure will come with a cost as the messy nature of the process over the past several weeks, they have made the business more uncertain and consumers less confident. but we are continuing to chip away at this problem, step by step. last year i signed into law about $1.7 trillion in the deficit reduction. it further reduces the deficit by raising $226 billion from the wealthiest households in america and there will be more deficit reduction as congress, they decide what to do with the automatic s

, the deficit is still too high. and we're still investing too little in the things that we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. that tea w that's why speak eer boehner ani tried to put the country on a path to paying down its debt and putting americans back to work, and education and job training. unfortunately, there just wasn't enough support or time for that kind of large agreement in a lame-duck session of congress. and that failure comes with a cost. as the the messy nature of the process over the past several week has made business more uncertain and consumers less confident. but, we are continuing to chip away at this problem. step by step. last year i signed into law $1.7 trillion in deficit reduction. tonight's agreement further reduces the deficit by raising $620 billion in revenue from the wealthiest households in america. and there will be more deficit reduction as congress decide to what to do about the automatic spending cuts that we have now delayed for two months. i want to make this point. as i have demonstrated throughout the past several weeks. i am very open to

that well before now. we should do it for many reasons. one, we need it. we have a deficit that's not controllable. we've got to bring our deficit into better control. that means we need to reduce spending and we need the revenues in order to be able to give the right blueprint for america's future and growth. we also need to get a broader package done because of predictability. the private sector needs to know what the rules are. they need to know what the tax code is going to look like. they need to know what the spending programs are going to look like. they need to have confidence that we have our budget under better control. we should have gotten that done. i've spoken several times on the floor about we should have adopted the simpson-bowles framework. to me, that was a bipartisan balanced approach for how we could have gotten out of our fiscal problems. we're not going to be able to get that done in the next two days before we adjourn on january 2. but we need to recognize that we need to do that. now, mr. president, i've heard a lot of my colleagues come to the floor. i'

to reduce the deficit. one trillion dollars in spending cuts over the next 10 years but these changes would result in more savings in the next 10 years and would solve our deficit problems for a decade. they say their biggest priority is dealing with the deficit. they are behaving and protecting the tax breaks for the wealthiest americans. that seems to be their overriding theme. host: a new development yesterday, the vice president joe biden was called in by mitch mcconnell, who said he needed a dance partner in all of this. guest: if you remember on friday, the president said he was going to turn over the lead to senator reid and senator mcconnell to work out a deal that could pass the senate and that he would sign on to whatever deal that was. senator reid and senator mcconnell were not able to reach that deal. the negotiations between them have turned increasingly bitter and senator mcconnell basically said that he could not work with senator read anymore and reached out to joe biden and ask him to resume the role that he has had in previous negotiations. the arbiter, the deal maker. jo

and services among consumers, they are chronically bad at creating a balance between deficit and surplus regions. a geographic problem, and intertemporal. remember -- if that comes first, suddenly the money lender who later becomes a banker who later becomes wall street plays a hugely significant role in this process. the banker is the conduit of that recycling mechanism. when they get an increase in proportion as the result of their mediation of that process. given that, a failure of the banker is not the same thing as the failure of a clothes maker. suddenly, there are two things that must happen. one, society will demand that banks are not allowed to go to the wall. then bankers are affectively given carte blanche, free money for themselves. and the whole mechanism breaks down like in 2008. it is often said in the eurozone, we made a huge error in europe of binding disparate economies by means of common currency. this is not the first time these if things that happened. it happened in the united states of america. you have disparate economies in the united states of america that are

, maybe directly to deficit reduction, but i think it would be a nice incentive. host: we should note that while the house is coming in at noon and it could vote as early as 1:00 p.m. today, the senator did not get -- the senate did not go home after building this -- voting earlier this morning. harry reid said the senate will be coming in at 2:00 p.m. eastern time today. what is going on? guest: i do not know. i had not thought about that. usually, when these sneaky deals come together, usually you do not have worst trading in the -- horsetrading in the house that would require it to come back to the senate. i would be surprised if that happened, partly because however much speaker boehner might not like the bill, and his caucus might not like the bill, i think it is so painful and awful that they would rather just have votes on the things. if it failed, that would be interesting. i do not think it will. the size of the vote in the senate this morning, and the fact that republicans would not even go along with a much better deal for them, i just did not see how they come up with some

billion at a time when we are right now, people are sitting in rooms trying to decide how to get deficit reduction. and we pass something that saves $24 billion in a fiscally responsible way, cutting programs. we cut 100 different programs and authorizations. we went through every single page of the farm bill, which is what we ought to be doing in every part of government to be responsible, to make the tough choices, to set good priorities. we did that. and now at the last minute none of that matters? they're trying to stick in an extension that only extends part of the farm programs and keep 100% of the direct subsidies going. madam president, that's amazing to me. i have to say that is absolutely amazing to me. and i want to hear somebody justify that on the floor. now we're going to hear all kinds of things. well, the extension involves possibly a budget point of order. this whole bill coming to the floor is going to have multiple points of order that we're going to have to waive. this is not about procedure or budget points of order. it's about whether or not we mean it when we say w

in the broader effort to strengthen our economy. and the fact is that the deficit is still too high. we are still investing too little in the things we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. that is why john boehner and i try to negotiate a larger our agreement to put this country on a path to pay its debt. and also to put people back to work with building roads, bridges. but unfortunately, there was just not enough support or time for that type of larger agreement. that failure comes with a cost. with the messy nature over the last several weeks as meek business on certain. and consumers less confident. but we are continuing to chip away, step by step. last year i sent it signed into 1.7 trillion dollars into overseas production. tonight will for early further reduce the deficit with $620 million in revenue for the wealthiest americans and will be more deficit-reduction as congress decides what to do what the automatic spending cuts. that now, will be delayed for the next two months. let me make this point. as i demonstrated for the past several weeks i'm very open to confidence. and

. federal deficits were .8%. that's .8% of gdp. now our trillion dollars federal deficit amounts to 7.3% of gdp. back then trade was aa contributor to economic growth for the, economy. reunion $500 million at $4.2 billion adjustedio for inflation, and we're running a trade deficit,it trade deficit $536 billion. $536 million. back then social security made up 6.5%. 6.5%. of the federal budget. 6.5%. the decayed and medicare didn't exist back the let's compare that to what we are doing now. a 20% of the budget on social security, and thene throw a 21% more of the federal budget for medicare, medicaid, and anotr 13% for other social programs, food stamps. so that comes up to a whopping 54% of the budget. 54%. forgot to mention this. it is kind of important, isn't it? back than median family income was about $38,000. $38,000. today it is $62,000. we will pretend that looks like a two and that looks like a six. we haven't done too well, more than half a century in raising a the median income ine this country and that is something he is right about, we do have to fix that. imagine this, it'

enacted by congress to frighten itself into passing deficit reduction measures which means unless congress acts in the next 48 hours the bush tax cuts will expire along with federal unemployment insurance and a broad package of the spending cuts including defense spending will take effect. do weeks of fruitless negotiations and john boehner and senate leader are working on a deal this morning to avoid the fiscal cliff, or as chris hayes and i call it, the fiscal curve. the deadline is soft. it's not like every american is going to be handed a bill on january 1st and there's way to manage the damage if the country goes over. the senate is set to convene this afternoon with the house to follow tonight. there's a chance that a compromise will be reached, less than 48 hours before tax rates revert to their clinton dasher are levels and board across the board spending cuts talk effect. when the president took to the podium friday afternoon to urge the law enforcements to get their act together with he didn't exactly project confidence. >> this is deja vu all over again. america wonders why it i

on debt and deficits. we kept on pushing it off, pushing it off into the future. now we are right at the point where we have to make a decision on debt, dficits and spending and all we're talking about is a deal on taxes. it seems very likely that tax rates on higher income people will go up. we know for a fact that social security taxes will go up tomorrow, and some obamacare taxes they kick in as well tomorrow morning. so all we're talking about at the moment is raising taxes, we are doing nothing on deficit, debt and spending, that means this wrangling, this mess will continue. rick: child tax credits get extended according to some reports now. the earned income tax credit gets he can tended. the college tax credit gets extended for another five years, these are all things that cost u.s. taxpayers a lot of money, and it's probably just the beginning. >> it sounds like they are throwing a lot of items into the tax basket. i'd like to hear what they are going to say about the alternative minimum tax and the estate tax is that included in this tax basket? you'll notice, rick all t

, especially today dealing with how to reduce the deficit with spending cuts. one of the big concerns that lawmakers have is the impact of these across-the-board spending cuts due to kick in at midnight tonight, that will affect many federal agencies and the military. and the concern is that would cost jobs, it would limit programs, and would have a harmful effect on the economy. so to delay that has a cost that further adds to the deficit. so they have been trying to find ways to offset that cost. to bring in new revenue through these new taxes, to protect the current tax rates for the majority of americans. so anyone who earns less than 400,000 dollars as an individual will have the same tax rates as they do now. other sorts of tax provisions like the 2% payroll tax will stay in effect. and for those people who have been out of work the longest and have been depending on unemployment benefits, those will continue as a part of this deal. it is complicated. it has very significant impact on the economy, on people's pocketbooks, and there has been sharp political divide for a very long

that you were going to have a balanced approach to deficit reduction. so this revenue increase will supposedly be about 5% of the deficit. what are you going to do about closing the other 95% of the deficit? what is your plan, mr. president? what's your plan to save social security? what's your plan to save medicare? how do you plan to rein in the growth of government? how do you plan on reducing the deficit and stabilizing our debt? this is all about demanding from the president, and quite honestly, democrats and the senate to show us your plan. hey, harry reid, how about passing budgets for the first time in three years. how about being willing to be held accountable for a change. >> these are all great fiscally prudent managerial notions as a former businessman, i expect nothing less, but senator johnson, you know you're not going to get all that. and i guess my question is will republicans in the senate hold up a debt ceiling unless and until let's say they get a spending sequester or substitute or something that you can get your arms around. >> well, certainly what i'm goi

deficit and debt and then a more recent one that passes an extension of all the bush tax cuts. so the their position right now, at least speaker boehner's is, hey, it is time for the senate to act on some of our bills. we'll keep an eye what is happening there. heather: busy day for them. president obama taking his case to the american public. here is what he had to say about the situation playing out on capitol hill. >> what's been holding us back is the dysfunction here in washington and if, you know, people start to see that on january 1st this problem still hasn't been solved, that we haven't seen the deficit reduction we could have had, the republicans been willing to take the deal i gave them, if they say, that people's taxes have gone up, which means consumer spending is going to be depressed, obviously that will adverse reaction in the markets. heather: there is lot at stake for all americans. three big issues on the financial front this morning as a matter of fact,. stu varney, host of "varney & company" on the fox business network joins us now. stu, no deal on capitol hi

hasn't been solved, that we haven't seen the deficit reduction that we could have had had the republicans been willing to take the deal that i gave them, if they say that people's taxes have gone up, which means consumer spending is going to be depressed, then, obviously, that's going to have an adverse reaction in the markets. >> what about automatic spending cuts? those take effect january 1st, as well. do they have to be part of this deal? you've got half of those cuts in defense law? >> well, congress agreed they would cut an additional $1.2 trillion in spending. they put a committee together to try to come up with those numbers. they didn't figure out how to do it. so what we now have is a situation where these automatic spending cuts go into place. now, if we have raised some revenue by the wealthy paying a little bit more, that would be sufficient to turn off what is so-called the sequester, these automatic spending cuts, and that also would have a better outcome for our economy long-term. but, you know, so far, at least, congress has not been able to get this stuff

agreement, a bigger deal, a grand bargain or whatever you want to call it, that solves the deficit problems in a balanced and responsible way that does not just deal with taxes but also spending so that we can put all this behind us and focus on growing our economy. with this congress, that was obviously too much to hope for at this time. [laughter] maybe we can do it in stages. we will solve this problem instead in several steps. in 2011, we started reducing the deficit through $1 trillion in spending cuts which have taken place. the agreement being worked on right now would further reduce the deficit by asking the wealthiest 2% of americans to pay higher taxes for the first time in two decades so that would add additional hundreds of billions of dollars to deficit reduction. that is progress but we will need to do more. keep in mind that just last month, republicans in congress of they would not agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest americans and the agreement being discussed would raise those rates permanently. [applause] keep in mind, we will still have more work to do. we still ha

, is this the deal i would have preferred? no. but this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need. most importantly, it will allow us to avoid default and end the crisis that washington imposed on the rest of america. it ensures also that we will not face this same kind of crisis again in six months or eight months or 12 months. and it will begin to lift the cloud of debt and the cloud of uncertainty that hangs over our economy. >> it's a real disappointment today. i'm sorry that the so-called super committee was not able to do its work because this makes it much more difficult to achieve the deficit reduction targets that must be done. what happens next is there will be $1.2 trillion reduction in spending through what's called sequester. >> under current law on january 1st, 2013, there's going to be a massive fiscal cliff of large spending cuts and tax increases. i hope that congress will look at that and figure out ways to achieve the same long-run fiscal improvement without having it all happen at one date. >> there's still significant distance between the two

go up as part of an overall deficit reduction. >> a health scare for hillary clinton. new details as the secretary of state undergoes treatment for a blood clot in a new york hospital. >>> ringing in the new year. from sydney to new york city. the world turns the page to 2013. good day. i'm chris live in washington in for andrea today. deal or no deal? as vice president joe biden and senate republican leader mitch mcconnell continue negotiations, we just have learned that president obama will speak about the fiscal cliff at 1:30 p.m. eastern time. with all that happening, let's get right to our daily fix. nbc's kelly o'donnell on capitol hill, nbc's kristen welker at the white house, and jonathan capehart, washington post editorial writer and my colleague and an msnbc contributor. okay, kelly. the action is on the hill where it's been for the last few days. let's start with you. this is a fast-moving story. give us the latest perimeters of what appears -- i emphasize appears to be the start of a deal. >> well, it has been coming closer together, so we are told. the question is wha

. you know in november, the deficit was $172 billion. that was 25% higher than the november deficit of last year, and that's because -- not because revenue -- revenue was increased by 10 billion, but it was a $44 billion increase in spending. these people have no idea how to control spending. now they set us up for a fiscal canyon come march, and somebody better find barack obama in hawaii and ask him what does he mean he won't have a debate over the debt ceiling? is he going to raise that ceiling by executive decree? >> we'll find out. >> quincy, too, i want to bring you into this discussion here. what michael just highlighted was his big concern over deficit debt levels, that's fine, but we also know that going over the fiscal cliff, allowing some of these cuts to happen does mean cuts to the gdp. first off, do you like the cuts for tween, especially given some of the concerns that we've just raised about the end of the first quarter? >> yeah. we do, absolutely. coming into the -- the real fiscal cliff debate where it was off again, on again, it was amazing because the cyclical st

in new spending on a night it added $4 trillion to the deficit. and congressman king is not the only one outraged that politics took precedence over people. >> republicans in congress brought this house to a new low last night. >> we're all hit hard enough with the recession. on top of that now we have to deal with the anxiety and the failure of congress to act. >> talk to the people. look into their eyes. understand their needs. come walk with me, mr. speaker. >> this is time to stop debating and take the gloves off. jersey style. >> and speaking of jersey style, governor chris christie came out swinging this afternoon. >> shame on you. shame on congress. on a political chess board of internal palace intrigue politics, our people were played last night as a pawn. and that's why people hate washington, d.c. that's why they hate this politics. last night it was my party responsible. >> under fire, speaker boehner met with lawmakers from new york and new jersey just last hour relaying to them that he'll hold a vote friday for part of the sandy supplement. mike viqueira joins us live from w

a plant to grow the economy and shrink our efforts -- deficit. it is a balanced plan, one that would cut spending in a responsible way and ask the wealthiest americans to pay a little more. i will keep working with anybody serious about getting a comprehensive plan like this done because it is the right thing to do for our economic growth. we are not at the point where in a couple of days, the losses at the americans' tax rates are going up. the americans paycheck will get a lot smaller. that would be the wrong thing to do for our economy. it would hurt middle-class families and it would hurt the businesses that depend on your spending. and congress can prevent it from happening, if they act now. leaders in congress are working on a way to prevent this tax hike on the middle class and i believe we may be able to reach an agreement that can pass both houses in time. but, if an agreement is not reached on time, i will urge the senate to hold an up or down vote on a basic package that protect the middle tax from the income tax hike, extends vital unemployment insurance and lays the groundwo

continues the concerning trend throughout the 112th congress of attempting to address deficit reduction on the backs of middle income workers in the federal government. again by attacking their take-home pay. these are the dedicated folks who work at our v.a. hospitals. they protect our borders. . they run the research facilities and cure deadly disease and they provide services to the defense department, the state department. so these are the people that are doing the hard work, and this is not a way to repay them. again, they are already in the second year of a 2 1/2-year pay freeze. i agree that that pay freeze should apply to me and other members of congress. however, these hardworking federal employees should not be asked to carry even more of this burden. i thank the gentleman for yielding, and i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: mr. speaker, i know my friend from virginia means well, but once again he talks about a lack of accomplishment. apparently he has not looked at the work th

trillion in new debt. trillion dollars deficits as far as the eye can see and all he wants to fight for is higher taxes that will fund a mere 8 and a half days of government. frankly nothing but a pathetic disgrace. you the american people deserve a government that lives within its means. you deserve a government that is not obsessed with using your money to accumulate their power. it is time for americans to understand the simple truth of what is going on here. a truth by the way that an abusively biased news media just ignores. joining us now with reaction as america is on the brink republican senators pat toomey and ron johnson. senators, welcome back. >> hi, sean. >> hi, sean. >> sean: let's start with the meeting today. senator toomey, i'm told that the president wassed adamant n the meeting and didn't come off, are the original request was to keep tax rates at the same for the middle class but everybody above $250,000 going up. is that what you heard? >> i haven't heard about specific elements of the conversation, sean, i wasn't in the room. what i do understand from people w

think that i will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone without asking also equivalent sacrifice from millionaires or companies with a lot of lobbiesists, et cetera. if they think that's how we'll solve this, they've got another thing coming. >> from what we hear the senate republicans have gone along with a tax increase. i can imagine what the president said and what they're talking about is not pleasing to you. >> well, looks like another washington deal and not a fair deal. we've got spending problems. we've got entitlement problems. senate republicans have agreed to tax increases, then i think we're missing out on the real part of the package we need to have. that's dealing with a spending problem. >> would you vote for a deal with these tax increases? >> no, i don't think so. when i look at those numbers, we're still trying to sort through those. it looks like at least a million small businesses will see taxes increase. i have yet to see any small business owner that says you increase my taxes, i'm going to grow the economy, i'm going to hire more people

Excerpts 0 to 65 of about 618 results.

Click for
next 100 results
(Some duplicates have been removed)


Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)